Viewfinder options, so many, which to choose and why?

[AlanG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If it ain't broke, don't fix it...

 

Nikon could have said the same thing about the F.

 

Digital photography is not the same as film photography and the M9 is not the same as an M3. It is an electronic camera now.

 

Leica already sells a camera that has a clip on EVF.

 

You can't focus tilt shift lenses or long lenses on an M using the rangefinder.

 

A rangefinder can only focus on the center of the frame.

 

Optical viewfinders only give an approximation of the image.

 

I am simply reporting how I use magnified live view effectively. I am not lying when I say that I find it very useful. There is no possible way that the M rangefinder will be as accurate nor can a rangefinder preview depth of field. The rangefinder won't do you much good should you wish to attach the M to a microscope, a telescope, or some other device. In the past, Leica made various beam splitter and shock mounted leaf shutter devices for these applications.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[pop]

Nikon could have said the same thing about the F.

 

Digital photography is not the same as film photography and the M9 is not the same as an M3. It is an electronic camera now.

 

Leica already sells a camera that has a clip on EVF.

 

You can't focus tilt shift lenses on an M using the rangefinder.

 

There's a great number of things you can't do on an M. But then, there are a few things which the M does exceedingly well.

[diogenis]

Nikon could have said the same thing about the F.

But it didn't.

So ask all the switchers to an M9 from a Nikon what they say about their obvious change. In fact no need to ask, just read the comments in here. Or are they all under agendas?

Digital photography is not the same as film photography and the M9 is not the same as an M3. It is an electronic camera now.

 

Leica already sells a camera that has a clip on EVF.

Really? which one?

You can't focus tilt shift lenses or long lenses on an M using the rangefinder.

 

I am simply reporting how I use magnified live view effectively. I am not lying when I say that I find it very useful. There is no possible way that the M rangefinder will be as accurate nor can a rangefinder preview depth of field. I don't think the rangefinder will do you much good should you wish to attach the M to a microscope, a telescope, or some other device. In the past, Leica made various beam splitter and shock mounted leaf shutter devices for these applications.

I agree with you here.

As with everything technical, some things needs to be taken care off.

However, finding the correct distance of your subject has nothing in common with how you compose. Now, I don't have a long lens to check your theories with M, so I can only assume you maybe right, even though Leica claims that with it's system, you can focus correctly upto 135mm lens.

Maybe you need a magnifier, maybe you also need to be more carefull, maybe you need to stop the lens more, but many have showed us here that it works. Besides most work with very long lenses is done in infinity, so really there is no problem. At least not that much to justify an EVF.

Saying all that however, there has to be either a focus confirmation method, or most probably some sort of focus assistance ala X1

[AlanG]

There's a great number of things you can't do on an M. But then, there are a few things which the M does exceedingly well.

 

And those things won't disappear simply because the camera allows for live view.

[AlanG]

 

This isn't as good as the EVF for the Olympus cameras. The Leica one costs $330 and the same one with the Panasonic label costs $150.

 

The Olympus one is below and costs about $280.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[diogenis]

Yea... that one here smells Panasonic all over it

but look here:

...is particularly useful when shooting under extreme lighting conditions.

Anyway it's a piece of junk.

 

This thing is exactly a statement from Leica how much it hates EVFs. Who do you ever imagine will buy such a thing and throw $330?

[AlanG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This thing is exactly a statement from Leica how much it hates EVFs. Who do you ever imagine will buy such a thing and throw $330?

 

Some site called the "l-camera forum" seems to have a few users of the device. As I said, I tried both and the Olympus one is much better. I'm sure these will improve over time.

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/digital-forum/152532-d-lux-5-external-electronic-viewfinder.html

 

Here is a link to a $600 pro video EVF for DSLRs. But I'm sure you'll hate it because it is too large.

 

http://store.redrockmicro.com/EVF

[diogenis]

I highly doubt they ever will.

Have you ever looked the world from a bright line X1 OVF?

LEICA X1 Bright Line Finder 36mm.

It's like ages, aeons ahead EVFs.

And since the X1 is AF it works extremely well to compose

[jaapv]

There is no possible way that the M rangefinder will be as accurate

 

Maybe no possible way, but also no possible need. I find when I take my Summilux 50 shots, or Apo-telyt shots, that the intended plane of focus is exactly in the middle of the native DOF of the sensor (That is when magnifying to pixel level that the COC is identical to the Airy disk), except when I screw up the focussing.

[AlanG]

I highly doubt they ever will.

Have you ever looked the world from a bright line X1 OVF?

LEICA X1 Bright Line Finder 36mm.

It's like ages, aeons ahead EVFs.

And since the X1 is AF it works extremely well to compose

 

That is a fixed lens camera so an OVF is a simple solution. You already have that simple solution for the M. We are talking about ways to make the M more useful. Nothing will ever be perfect. SLR viewing is not perfect either. That is why live view can supplement it too.

 

Why do you keep going off in tangents like this?

 

Have you ever looked through the optical finder/rangfinder of a Linhof Super Technika 70?

 

I probably have owned a half dozen optical viewfinders, frame finders, 45 degree prisms, 90 degree prisms, waist level finders, stove pipes for Hasselblad, every type of Linhof finder and reflex housing, Minox 45 degree mirror device, beam splitters, a lot of that old Leica gear that they don't make any more, microscopes, telescopes, hundreds of cameras from 9.5mm to 8x10, and a lot of other stuff I can't recall. So I'm pretty familiar with how to frame and focus an image.

[bill]

Leica already sells a camera that has a clip on EVF.

 

Yes, and we all know how popular that is...

 

You can't focus tilt shift lenses or long lenses on an M using the rangefinder.

 

I have never, ever felt the need for a tilt-shift lens on any system at any time.

 

The vast majority of my photography is below 90mm; that is one of the reasons why I use an M.

 

I don't think I am alone in these assertions.

 

A rangefinder can only focus on the center of the frame.

 

It takes a moment to recompose. I prefer that to jabbing my finger on a touchscreen...

 

Optical viewfinders only give an approximation of the image.

 

And an EVF is just a set of pixels...

 

An OVF shows, an EVF interprets. With an OVF between me and my subject we are separated by some glass. With an EVF intervening we are separated by electronics and the work of a team of programmers.

 

There is no possible way that the M rangefinder will be as accurate nor can a rangefinder preview depth of field.

 

It's accurate enough for me, and many others. Oh, and my M2 rangefinder previews depth of field.

 

The rangefinder won't do you much good should you wish to attach the M to a microscope, a telescope, or some other device.

 

I don't, and again, I am not alone in that. I have never felt the need to attach to either of those devices but if I did I would use something designed for the purpose.

 

In the past, Leica made various beam splitter and shock mounted leaf shutter devices for these applications.

 

...and the reason that they do not do so now is that the Leica M is a specialised tool successfully occupying an evolutionary niche. They leave others to pander to those who "need" such "applications". Oh, and they make money.

 

Now, some may say that these points may sound like restatements of many things I and others have said in the past. That's because they are. Honestly, we are achieving nothing here, because there is no end to this mass debate.

 

Next?

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[bill]

We are talking about ways to make the M more useful.

 

Are "we"?

 

I could have sworn the OP originally asked:

 

I do not understand why there is such a longing to go back to the classic rangefinder system as on the M bodies. Why restrict yourself to sticking a camera to your face in order to frame a picture. I understand that many a great photographs have been shot from the "hip" so to speak using guess work to frame the picture as well as pre-setting the focus ring.....even guessing the exposure just from experience.

 

So, why restrict ourselves to a mechanical/electronic rangefinder system adding cost, size and weight to the camera, when we should take advantage of today’s technology to give us smaller, lighter, cheaper equipment that also allows us more flexibility as well.

 

...I thought we were responding to his questions, not trying to find ways to convert the M to EVF and thereby make a sow's ear out of a silk purse.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[AlanG]

...I thought we were responding to his questions, not trying to find ways to convert the M to EVF and thereby make a sow's ear out of a silk purse.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

 

Perhaps you failed to fully appreciate the concept "optional" of a clip on EVF. Obviously this item is not for you and neither are tilt/shift and long lenses. That is why those are optional too. Do you own every lens and accessory that Leica makes? Why not and which ones are the best? I doubt if there is anyone who owns a "complete" Nikon or Canon system either.

 

A lot of great photos can be made with lenses that are in a narrow focal length range, but I would find it very limiting of my vision and imagination to restrict myself to just using those. That is one reason I have owned microscopes and telescopes too.

 

I own 6 tilt shift and PC lenses. Ever since I graduated college, I have always owned some cameras that have had the ability to change the focus plane along with rise, fall, and shift. These are basic concepts in creative and precision photography that I rely on to express myself and solve problems for my clients. I bought 200mm and 300mm lenses when I was 17 years old and typically have had a lot of use for lenses in the 70-400mm range. I used to use the 640 Novoflex on an SL to shoot auto racing. I also use a fisheye lens quite a bit. It really surprised me how often clients would choose a fisheye shot over a similar rectilinear shot. And the fisheye is used a lot for QTVR.

 

As an illustration of how I try to explore a wide range of subjects in a variety of ways, here is a cross polarized shot of vitamin C crystals that I made using my Leitz Ortholux microscope and Aristophot 4x5 camera. (So it is Leica related.)

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[bill]

THE OVF IN THE M9 IS OBSOLETE. ARE YOU HAPPY NOW? AN EVF IS MUCH BETTER FOR EVERY CONCEIVABLE SITUATION AND SURELY LEICA KNOWS THIS AND WILL BE REMOVING THE OVF FROM FUTURE M MODELS.

 

Alan, seriously, you are not winning converts to your cause; further sarcasm does not help.

 

I've tried to bring this back on track. I have failed. I shall leave you to it (again).

 

Carry on.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[AlanG]

Alan, seriously, you are not winning converts to your cause; further sarcasm does not help.

 

I've tried to bring this back on track. I have failed. I shall leave you to it (again).

 

Carry on.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

 

That was only addressed to the one person who kept responding in a way that I felt required this reply. As he continuously put words in my mouth... so to speak.

 

Look Bill. I really do not think that live view, EVFs, SLRs, OVFs, rangefinders, waist level finders, 45 degree prisms, 90 degree prisms, right angle finders, monocular or binocular focusing on a 4x5, twin lens reflex, or any other concept is the holy grail of photography. I have owned them all and used each extensively. I just like having as many options available to me as possible on every camera. And I don't see the simplicity of requiring two or more systems when one may do.

[pop]

And those things won't disappear simply because the camera allows for live view.

 

given.

the.

current.

technology.

you.

can.

not.

build.

an.

M.

type.

camera.

with.

live.

view.

and.

the.

same.

image.

quality.

[AlanG]

given.

the.

current.

technology.

you.

can.

not.

build.

an.

M.

type.

camera.

with.

live.

view.

and.

the.

same.

image.

quality.

 

I presume you are aware that this is a hypothetical discussion. However I am curious how you could know for sure that it can't be done. Maybe it is just a question of costs or other factors we are not privy to that are subject to change.

 

But if you do have some kind of special knowledge on the subject, do you have an idea how long it will be before this will be possible?

 

As it is, with my very limited knowledge about the availability of sensors and custom micro lenses, a Sony 24 megapixel full frame sensor or the kind used in a Nikon D3X, could be used (if available) and should work ok for lenses 50mm and up. (Maybe even for a 35mm or some of the wider lenses.) And that is without special lens correction in firmware. Considering that the M9 employs vignetting and lens cast correction in firmware, I'm not sure exactly how far apart these sensors are from each other. So while this isn't a complete solution, maybe there is not that far to go before it is. I guess I'm just a dreamer but I think time will tell. My bet is that the M10 will have live view.

 

By the way. In the MF world, the rap on Kodak sensors has generally been that they have had worse lens color cast issues than Dalsa sensors have but maybe Kodak has improved this on the M9 sensor. However, I'm way out of my knowledge range here.

[NZDavid]

Why not keep the M the same, and develop a new EVIL camera along the lines of Panasonic? Or just opt for Panasonic in the first place? Why be so hellbent on changing a product that already works?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[cernobila]

Well, some statistics on the situation as it is till now.

 

1 question

17 participants with an opinion/input

983 who had a look but in most cases did not have any input or did not care

???? the number of members on the Leica Forum

???? the number of Leica owners/users

???? the number of Camera owners/users on this planet

???? and the rest. (a great future market)

 

There are those that seem to know with certainty what Leica will/will not do in the future......(maybe they work for the company)

There are those that know what they would like to see in the next model Leica....

There are those that know what they don't want to see in the next model Leica....

And there are those that don't want anyone to change the M Leica specifically.

 

Now, there is me.....having used Laicas with all manner of viewing/focusing systems in the past, as well as using a number of Japanese cameras.....this is what I would like to see in the next model Leica. (if it does not happen, so be it, I will not loose any sleep over it)

 

Small and light, rangefinder as well as live view fold-out screen, (if I had to choose, I would go for the screen) take existing lenses directly or via an adapter. (in case smaller, lighter lenses would be developed for the new body)

 

btw, are there any Leica representatives on this forum? On another forum to do with flashlights, there were representatives from various manufacturers available to give their input when required, this was quite helpful.

[AlanG]

Why not keep the M the same, and develop a new EVIL camera along the lines of Panasonic? Or just opt for Panasonic in the first place? Why be so hellbent on changing a product that already works?

 

That is a great point and I wouldn't be surprised if Leica expands upon the X1 concept. It seems to me that they developed the X1 to have a model that is differentiated from the Panasonic offerings. I would expect that they still see this as a viable way to go as Leica's future may depend on the development of more in-house products. Personally I think it would have really been interesting if Leica had come out with a small APS AF that had a zoom optical viewfinder that tracked a 24-70 equivalent fixed lens. Especially if they had made the first version of this 4 or 5 years ago. If Sony develops a good EVF for the NEX and makes a more "pro-like" version, that may take over the market since other companies are getting on board to make lenses for the E mount especially with the introduction of the new Sony E mount video cameras.

 

As for keeping the M the same... I can't see the future in that for Leica as competition will make the M niche less appealing over time. That being said, since Leica can't even fulfill lens orders, I have no idea what their plan is for the future. But they should at least figure out how to make all the stuff that people want to buy today.